3 ms·
> Since Next.js 10, we've been obsessed with further improving the developer experience of Next.js. In 10.1 and 10.2 we improved startup time by up to 24% and s
by andrewmcwatters 5y ago
> Since Next.js 10, we've been obsessed with further improving the developer experience of Next.js. In 10.1 and 10.2 we improved startup time by up to 24% and shaved off another 40% of processing time for changes through React Fast Refresh. You've been getting these amazing speed improvements just by keeping Next.js updated.
I know they think this is good marketing, but it absolutely does not inspire confidence. Why was it so slow to begin with? Why would someone who’s never used Next.js want to use it after reading this?
Too many JavaScript projects talk about how much faster they’re getting or how “blazing” fast they are. I don’t think these people know what “fast” is.
- smt88 5y agoMost of the time savings of a modern JS framework are in thinking/coding/researching phases, not "waiting for my build to finish". Even for a big site, startup time is not important at all if you have hot reloading.
- noahtallen 5y agoI disagree, start up time is still very useful to improve if developers only interact with your project maybe once a week. It’s also very handy if you’re doing CD, as your entire build pipeline will finish more quickly, which makes reverts and deploys faster. It’s also good for quick bug fixes, where something needs to be fixed as quickly as possible. It can make a big difference on big sites, from like 10 minutes to 1 or 2 minutes.
- todd3834 5y agoDo you feel the same way when Apple releases a new chip that is X% faster? For many people: complete + iteration > optimized with less functionality
- TechBro8615 5y agoSo basically your argument is: - JavaScript is too slow - Too many JavaScript projects try to not be slow Am I getting this right?